Over-educated, under-employed, jaded, new political party: Members wanted!

I have been advised to just let this conversation die. Sorry to have troubled you all.

a reply to: onequestion

Good for him!

Count me in! I have bounced off a glass ceiling several times as I struggled through a Twenty Year career.

You must have some sort of platform in mind..

originally posted by: frayedknot
I have been advised to just let this conversation die. Sorry to have troubled you all.

While I mostly fall on the other side of this discussion (I guess that should be defined*,) it is a good discussion to bring to the table. Don't give up on it.

*Definition: As someone with a PhD in mathematics I don't see the lack of personal opportunities.

I agree with you OP and do not let this thread die. It is needed and is of the utmost importance.

I have a BA in music composition and am employed part time at a big box retailer. While I expected to have a job "beneath" my educational level I at least expected to snag a full time job. So needless to say I am back at school to get a MA and k12 licensure and taking out more debt to do so.

It's not because I'm trying to avoid a job in the "free" market it's because I need this in order to do what I'm most qualified for - teaching and writing music.

You know what is going to happen though because of all the over qualified under employed, indebted people? The economy is going to crash and most likely collapse. People can't get good jobs because of the last crash and thus arent able to live and pay their debts this will strain the banks which will cause default. Those in college will not be able to get loans because of this and will be forced to move back with mom and pop and all those college professors and other college employees will lose their jobs.

This is why the fed can't and won't raise rates. See what this over inflated education system has done to this country?

I have a BSC (hons) first class and a Masters degree with distinction, however, I'm not working in the same field as my degrees were in, not even close... Although, I am making about 35 US dollars an hour, so I won't complain.

originally posted by: MOMof3
I think someone would come along and destroy you. Health and welfare of mankind does not make money.

You are correct. I think surveillance tech, tightly controlled media and perfected subterfuge techniques are keeping ALL of us from knowing if new activist groups or aspiring political parties are springing up. I'd argue the government today, nips such movements in the bud, sending participants to jail will-nilly, with no due process like was given in the 60's, and in turn, giving them horrible plea bargains at the end. I think people ARE indeed trying to take action, but are quickly stomped out, rounded up by LEO's and NONE of it gets to the media, including blogger and Instagram journalists. My guess is anyone that could teach them proper tactics to counter LEO's and EFFECTIVE political strategy, are quickly arrested on trumped up charges and threatened to never return to help the activists again "or else". American protesters and alternative parties are so poorly organized that I can't imagine them EVER having an ounce of success, but at the same time I think surveillance tech, tightly controlled media and perfected subterfuge techniques are ENTIRELY responsible for said poor organization and preparation

In addition, I've always had a feeling that third party candidates actual vote counts, post election, are NEVER accurately reported. I figure most of the time, a portion of their votes get thrown away, others are skimmed over and determined to be invalid, then accidentally missed or counted for the wrong candidate, etc. So when the results are reported, the public just assumes the "third party guy lost anyway", so we never really know for sure if they gained an increased number votes and support over the years. I suspect that MANY people are voting third parties and writing in candidates currently, with increasing in numbers every year and the true results are being downplayed by both the news and even by staff working at the polling locations.

originally posted by: greencmp
Indeed, considering how much people pay and what they do while matriculating, a university education is indicative of a desire to avoid the free market for as long as possible. Usually, the only place left for such folks is the university itself or some political appointment to a bureaucratic position.

What a laughable statement. The government has made licenses and certifications mandatory to enter and to continue working, in MANY professions today. Sure, not all these licenses and certifications require a 4-year degree or masters, but once you hit 60 semester units, you may as well find a way to get the 2-year degree. I work in construction engineering, where a degree is required to get the license, period! Also many states have eliminated the old rule where 8 years on the job was equivalent to a 4-year degree. But that hints at a larger policy issue, where the government WANTS people in school, not just to rack up debt, but also to keep them out of the larger job market.

Up to the 1940 a person could get just about any job with an 8th grade education, but today you need a BA or Masters for entry level.

Why?

Because the government & big business figured out a long time ago that populations would certainly increase over time, but due to technology advancements, the availability of jobs would not expand to meet that population growth. There is a reason they don’t want people dropping out of high school and then at the same time, encourage those high school graduates to attend junior college, then a 4 year university and finally a Masters degree or PhD. They do so because it DECREASES the amount of people looking for full-time employment at the SAME TIME, chasing after jobs in a market that CANNOT provide employment for everyone looking for, able, qualified for and willing to work.

Look at it this way, when people could get a job with an 8th grade education, they went out and did it as soon as possible (opportunity cost). Then jobs got scarcer and the minimum requirement became a high school diploma, adding 4 more years of people NOT Looking for jobs within their cohort. Then jobs got even scarcer and the minimum became a 2 or 4 year college degree, adding an additional 2-4 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort. Now jobs are really scarce and may require a Masters or PHD, adding an additional 2-7 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort.

Basically the way the economy has been structured TODAY, we are looking at young people within their cohort whom are NOT looking for full-time, career type, employment for 6-15 YEARS, beyond K-12, all while they finish more school!!!

This has been done ON PURPOSE, to keep the number people seeking employment lower. In 1920 after 8th grade everyone who was able, went out to look for work and typically found it, that’s simply NOT possible today under any circumstances. Easily accessed welfare will soon add another 1-3 years of people within a cohort, to those “not seeking employment”. Not to the specific detriment of society, but to continue to mask the illusion that jobs and upward mobility are still available. So, if someone gets a graduate degree and collects 1-3 years of welfare on top of than, that’s ONE less person competing for scarce jobs. The extra years of welfare are then acting in the same way to the larger economy as the increased minimum education levels for employment, with the real goal of decreasing the number of able-bodied applicants out on the job market at the same time. This cohort of people "not pursuing full-time employment" also includes those in Prison, Government pensioners/SSI and the disabled on government assistance. If everyone needed to go out and “get a job” or “start their own business” TODAY, as many “capitalists” and "entrepreneurs" suggest these days, we would all be making 0.25 cents a day.

With big business being hell bent on replacing living workers with machines, such comments as those in this post, miss a subtle point that ONLY the children of the wealthy will have the opportunity to become TRUE experts in such fields. Let me clarify, through the prior 20th century, a poor kid who studied hard could become a lawyer, engineer, accountant, even a doctor sometimes with the right combination of hard work, savings, scholarships, family support, etc, OR they simply went into the trades and learned on the job WITH pay. HOWEVER, in engineering and technician curriculum’s today, times are changing, which now favors kids whom have access to expensive software and hardware to “experiment” with and “practice” on before entering college or a particular training program. So when they finally get to college or to their first apprenticeship, those whom have had lots of free time to “play” with robotics and programming, outside of the classroom, WILL CERTAINLY outpace their less privileged peer, who flips burgers part-time, to pay rent and school expenses.

Don't you see, 2 years of free Junior College can, in theory, INSTANTLY remove millions of people from the unemployment rolls, filling out appllications and job fairs. It will also reduce the number of applicants applying to jobs, saving big business overhead costs. That Ford factory line worker job, that once had 25,000 applicants might only have 15,000 now, because 10,000 people instead went to "free" Junior College.

a reply to: boohoo

The most intelligent, productive and wealthy people I know did not attend an institutionalized university.

More importantly, they realize that education is a process, not a thing to acquire so they never stopped.

Conversely, the most ignorant, lazy and poor people I know have stellar 'educations' and six digit debt.

In most cases, their 'educations', lengthy as they were, are mere historical references.

originally posted by: greencmp
The most intelligent, productive and wealthy people I know did not attend an institutionalized university.

More importantly, they realize that education is a process, not a thing to acquire so they never stopped.

That wasn't my point. The market CANNOT sustain a horde of "entrepreneurs" AND most of these "entrepreneurs" still need to hire licensed professionals such as builders, accountants, lawyers, commercial drivers, etc, to keep their business running anyway. The government wants to INCREASE minimum licensure requirements for ALL trades and that usually means more formal, butt-in-the-seat, schooling. So whether an "entrepreneurs" specifically has the "license" themselves or not, is irrelevant because they still need these "licensed" people to run the business they have.

Don't any of you see the ruse here?

2 years of free Junior College can, in theory, INSTANTLY remove millions of people from the unemployment rolls, filling out applications and attending job fairs. It will also reduce the number of applicants applying to jobs, saving big business overhead costs. That Ford factory line worker job, that once had 25,000 applicants might only have 15,000 now, because 10,000 people instead went to "free" Junior College.

Obama is selling a stealth welfare/unemployment expansion plan, under the guise of "free higher education".

Is it easier to get voter approval for MORE welfare for the millions of unemployed OR eliminate their unemployment status by putting them in school full time? Government and big business know there is no way to ever employ these people, so they just kick the can down the road by putting on another band-aid, the band-aid in this case, is free schooling, which will INSTANTLY lower unemployment figures and reduce the downward pressure of, race to the bottom, falling wages, due to the current over supply of labor in the market.

May I ask what kinds of businesses these people have?

a reply to: boohoo

I agree. I didn't even consider that the free 2 year college thing would improve employment figures. Also think about how many people are currently in school with or without a part time job. Those people are all considered employed! In fact all you need is 20 dollars a week to be considered employed.

However some people are just content to have their heads in the sand, no matter the facts. If they're doing ok so is most everyone else.

a reply to: boohoo

I see, yes I agree.

I thought you were defending the professionalization of everything from toilet installations to journalism.

Our unemployment is hovering around 20% right now and I do not think that counts the hordes who are being tucked under the community college (or Ivy league) rug as you point out.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: boohoo

Conversely, the most ignorant, lazy and poor people I know have stellar 'educations' and six digit debt.

In most cases, their 'educations', lengthy as they were, are mere historical references.

You mean lawyers? Lol. That's about the only people I know with 6 figure debt besides doctors

But in all seriousness most people I know work their butts off in school. I sure did. I mean sure I had a couple lazy semesters but most the time I was pretty busy. To get any sort of good GPA you have to work for it.

a reply to: asmall89

"Education is what remains after one has forgotten what one has learned in school."

"Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death."

-Albert Einstein

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: asmall89

"Education is what remains after one has forgotten what one has learned in school."

"Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death."

-Albert Einstein

I don't like quotes from hypocrites.

"do as I say, not as I do".

This guy WANTED to be a professor, earned the equivalent of a "teaching degree" and only worked at the patent office because he needed income while he was still applying for academic positions and finishing his dissertation. In 1905 he completed his doctorate and in 1911 he got a full time professor position. I'm pretty sure he needed the degree, despite him pontificating about NOT needing it later in life.

Does anyone think he would have been able to come to America if he was not a full professor in possession of a PhD? If you think he would have been admitted tio the United States, without any credentials, look no further than the S.S. St. Louis.

a reply to: greencmp

Very true. He must have known from experience because he had an education.

I'm not defending the education system because it is unbelievably broken. It's not just college either, in fact I would argue that High School is really not necessary and should be restructured. The only reason I'm studying to become a teacher is so I can change it from the inside (hopefully).

However when people start picking on college grads (especially liberal arts majors) calling them stupid, lazy, arrogant etc. and saying they only go to college to avoid the "real" job market it offends me a bit. Most people I know have worked hard for their education as I have. I think that most college students are victim to society's expectations and the over inflated subsidized education industry.

Unfortunately no one is going to wake up until this whole thing blows up in our face. I'm surprised it lasted this long.

a reply to: boohoo

"One had to cram all this stuff into one's mind, whether one liked it or not. This coercion had such a deterring effect that, after I had passed the final examination, I found the consideration of any scientific problems distasteful to me for an entire year.... It is in fact nothing short of a miracle that the modem methods of instruction have not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry; for this delicate little plant, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom; without this it goes to wrack and ruin without fail. It is a very grave mistake to think that the enjoyment of seeing and searching can be promoted by means of coercion and a sense of duty. To the contrary, I believe that it would be possible to rob even a healthy beast of prey of its voraciousness, if it were possible, with the aid of a whip, to force the beast to devour continuously, even when not hungry - especially if the food, handed out under such coercion, were to be selected accordingly."

-Albert Einstein

I take no pleasure in causing the discomfort that is associated with revealing distasteful truths but, I do it anyway because it needs to be done.

originally posted by: asmall89
a reply to: greencmp

Very true. He must have known from experience because he had an education.

I'm not defending the education system because it is unbelievably broken. It's not just college either, in fact I would argue that High School is really not necessary and should be restructured. The only reason I'm studying to become a teacher is so I can change it from the inside (hopefully).

My hat is off to you, we need intelligent unindoctrinated minds to displace the time-clock paint-by-numbers pedagogic culture.

a reply to: greencmp

Love this quote. It is quite true. To me, I have always felt that the current education system believes that students are lazy and don't want to learn anything. When in fact it is human nature to be curious and to discover. That's why we're members of ATS right?

originally posted by: greencmp
To the contrary, I believe that it would be possible to rob even a healthy beast of prey of its voraciousness, if it were possible, with the aid of a whip, to force the beast to devour continuously, even when not hungry - especially if the food, handed out under such coercion, were to be selected accordingly."

-Albert Einstein

He was free to quit school and become a ditch digger, wasn't he? As far as I know, that was a real job back then, that paid a living wage. A simple time, with simple ways to earn wages to live on. Lets face it, the guy was a hypocrite and without his fancy degree, he would have died in a concentration camp like all of the non-PhD passengers on the S.S. St. Louis, that made it safely to America, but had to turn around and go back to Germany because of Bureaucrats.

a reply to: asmall89

That video was classic.